Thank you for your time and effort. Large scandals always stack around a prominent technology. However, before you start blaming Bytecoin, CryptoNote, or any other party for all the things you do not like in this world, I suggest you also read this article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conspiracy_theoryIt explains perfectly why it is so tempting to believe in villains being responsible for all humanity's problems. Be critical, think yourself. To my taste, your claim is way out of all propotions... Not really. He provided pretty strong evidence that the CN people and the BCN people are connected. Even after the CN people explicitly denied it. They never denied it: http://bitcoinbarbie.com/cryptonote-open-source-technology-concept/As we’ve mentioned before, CryptoNote team was not interested in building a currency. That is when Bytecoin developers took the lead. They are the team of top notch p2p and cryptocurrency developers, which have been contributing to the sphere for quite some time. They finalized our cryptographic and currency prototypes and coded a beautiful solution to represent CryptoNote. So PDF v.1 that is on the website could have been created after PDF v.2. Considering that the timespan between the two papers is almost 1 year, the first version could have been lost and then re-created from the second one, with potential mistakes of course. Who can tell! After all, it's the world with human factor in charge. This fact is disturbing per se. However, my point is you're trying too hard to take noise for signals and identify the patterns that don't exist... The claim is that Bytecoin either tricked or somehow deceived CryptoNote, created at least 6 forks (including Monero), promoted them, built a community around them. Some of the mentioned coins (Boolberry, duckNote, Fantomcoin) are so far from Bytecoin, you'd have to hire a separate dev team just to keep it going. If this is true what else are those "guys" can be responsible for? I'm sorry I'm not buying it. It's just a common sense underpinned by Hanlon's razor: Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity. It's more likely that these guys are just not really from within the forum community and that is pretty much it. This may as well be CryptoNote's PR. Such an attention to all the coins and the mysteries around them... So they claim that they're not Bytecoin but they also corroborate Bytecoin's lies regarding launch? |
|
|
|
Issues of religion aside, one known clever person advocated BTCD. This means I must eventually (hopefully before it is too late) do diligence on it. Signs are negative, but I have not reviewed content yet. Do you have any substantive comment on BTCD's technicals? Anyone? Bueller?
Who was that? I don't want to identify someone as clever by name without more evidence than I have already, and pumping a scamcoin would be evidence that I had mistaken slyness for cleverness. jl777 released the whitepaper already and killerstorm gave a pretty negative review of it on reddit.
Can't hope for much more than that for free, I guess. It's a weak data point though - just consistent with priors, no new signal. I guess I'll continue to ignore it. In any case I found the paper again: http://www.jl777.org/darkpaper-teleport-revealed/This doesn't sound like much to me. But I'm not qualified to pass judgement. Perhaps some other people here will take a took and share their opinions. |
|
|
|
Well I am selling all my Nxt as soon as I can, the fact that the community has shown that it will freeze any account that is inconvenient simply destroys all credibility they had, which being a pure POS wasn't much to begin with.
Somehow BTER's mistake will be somewhat handled by a community block is simply a joke, wasn't Nxt meant to be more decentralized than bitcoin?
The community actually showed the opposite. It was clear that they were not going to support a rollback as evidenced by the lack of forging on that chain. |
|
|
|
|
Now that Primedice has started their affiliate program, it has made me wonder what other programs are out there.
What other sites offer a competitive affiliate program?
|
|
|
|
I don't see how that will work out no anyone but the op. He'll get a few refs out of it but hard to know if he'll pay out fairly. Wasn't he the one who ran off with all of updown.bt's original sig campaign money? |
|
|
|
|
Game(s) you want: Tropico 4 Collector's Bundle (currently $5.99), The Witcher 2: Assassins of Kings Enhanced Edition(currently $3.99)
Fun idea. Thanks for doing this.
|
|
|
|
|
Why did Bter send the other 90 BTC to the hacker after he said the deal was off?!
That was insane.
|
|
|
|
Majority voting (democracy) in Parliament or even in popular vote (referendum) is one typical example of centralized solutions. It doesn't matter how many people share the same authority. Power is united in one centralized vote.
So if majority has ability to falsify ledger records, it's the same as the majority having the authority to take the physical gold out of your pocket. This is called tyranny of majority.
And here we have precedent. Only because of a relatively minor theft (less than 5%). It was much more with Vericoin. Who will be next?
No. Crypto coins are based on distributed consensus. |
|
|
|
Thank you for your time and effort. Large scandals always stack around a prominent technology. However, before you start blaming Bytecoin, CryptoNote, or any other party for all the things you do not like in this world, I suggest you also read this article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conspiracy_theoryIt explains perfectly why it is so tempting to believe in villains being responsible for all humanity's problems. Be critical, think yourself. To my taste, your claim is way out of all propotions... Not really. He provided pretty strong evidence that the CN people and the BCN people are connected. Even after the CN people explicitly denied it. |
|
|
|
and also BitcoinDark.
Issues of religion aside, one known clever person advocated BTCD. This means I must eventually (hopefully before it is too late) do diligence on it. Signs are negative, but I have not reviewed content yet. Do you have any substantive comment on BTCD's technicals? Anyone? Bueller? Who was that? jl777 released the whitepaper already and killerstorm gave a pretty negative review of it on reddit. So far it sounds like jl777 just has stated a bunch of problems he intends to solve, but hasn't actually solved anything yet. edit: by 'the whitepaper' i mean the one for 'teleport' or his anon tech. |
|
|
|
If you roll it back, NXT is definitely not decentralized.
This will make it centralized and even more useless.
You are retarded right? If the majority of the forging power wants to forge in an alternative chain, it is the most decentralized decision ever made. Every forger has in his hands to forge or not the alternative chain. If you roll it back, NXT is definitely not decentralized.
This will make it centralized and even more useless.
You mean, if a majority of users decide in a decentralised and consensual way to start using another blockchain, then that is centralisation? You are forgetting that the blockchain has always relied on the majority of users to establish history. What you are saying means that it's always been "centralised" around 51% of the hashing. This has always and will always be the case. Forking the chain actually uses this very principle. Yes! Of course it's decentralised! How do people not see that! |
|
|
|
|
My initial impression is that the crypto_zoidberg association with CN pretty hazy. I'm not really seeing it. But it's possible of course.
Other than that this was really interesting.
It boggles my mind why the CN developers would develop this technology and then do such stupid things. Really, really, dumb of them.
|
|
|
|
That's the Bter guy not the hacker I believe. |
|
|
|
The NXT protocol allows to rewrite the last 720 blocks with transactions in them if 51% of forgers decide to do it. This is by design until TF is implemented. We're now going to find out if 51% of forgers are for or against rewriting history, in about 15-16 hours. So basically, it's all standard operation, maybe a stress test mode for NXT network if you wish.
You can NOT rewrite history and be taken seriously This is no different from Bitcoin. If 51% of miners decide to rewrite history, they can secretly mine a longer chain and reverse all txs in the orphaned chain. Bitcoin is taken seriously. Not by all. And has all the Bitcoin miners gotten together and mined a longer chain? EVER? Yes. More than once. I posted one upthread. |
|
|
|
you are creating a precedent here. It is totally a centralized decision which will set a precedent in the future when and if crypto will be accepted as global currency. It will create the option for big entity to bring his mining power in action whenever a rolling back will be in his favour. This is an unwritten rule. Crypto stands for irreversibility not for lets take another look and if it doesn't suits us lets rewrite history by using latent forces of mining whenever a rolling back suits us.
crypto will never be accepted as a global currency with these types of things happening on a regular basis. I can understand not wanting to roll back the entire blockchain, but the patch that just rolls back the hackers transactions is a very reasonable solution. There has to be some form of "justice" or anarchy will reign and no one outside the crypto community will take any of this as a serious option. THANK YOU. Freezing a single transaction on the blockchain is perfectly reasonable and sane. What are we, hardcore buddhists that practice radical acceptance of some guy just running away with 5% of the world supply of NXT when we could have just launched a new wallet and denied those to him? If somebody has 5% of the world NXT to play around with, NXT is dead. If the NXT community lets this opportunity go because of some dogmatic ideological belief, NXT will look like a joke and will truely die. The fact we can do this is ADDED VALUE to the blockchain. If you want your transactions to be truely irreversible, then move to a crypto where that is the case (none of them) and stop bowing down the entirely fallacious altar of of the free market. You need to stay the hell out of crypto and go back to you bank debit card and paypal, you dont belong here.  Don't you see the difference between a centralised single entity(PayPal) and a decentralised group voting on a chain? For the record I'm not for or against rollbacks. But the amount of ignorance as to what decentralisation is somewhat amazing. |
|
|
|
...
Yes I just want to highlight one particular thing you wrote:
Besides, this is the free market in action. It's up to users to start using the new wallet, and we can collectively choose to ignore that transaction. There is nothing more democratic and decentralised than this. What in the hell are you complaining about?
Doing something like this voluntarily and choosing as a group to make a change is 100% a 'free market' action and is precisely the point of having the freedom to make such changes. Bitcoin is strong because the majority controls its destiny. If someone came along right now with a new development team that was better and faster as a group Bitcoin could decide to reject our current clients and switch over in a heartbeat. That won't happen though, but the idea is what drives Bitcoin. |
|
|
|
Yes, but that doesn't mean it is decentralized. In fact, centralization of mining power is one of the biggest concerns for BTC now. Further, I don't think BTC protocol allows rollbacks.
It's decentralized if no one entity has 51% power (or 90% when TF is implemented in a few months). There is no one entity in NXT that has 51% forging power. If forgers decide to download the modified release and do the rollback, then it's democracy in PoS style. BTC software could also be modified to do a rollback and if enough miners download it and reach 51% of mining power OR if enough miners decide to secretly mine a separate chain and reach 51% of mining power, they orphan all the other miners' blocks. For some strange reason, you seem to equate the majority threshold and democracy as the benchmark for decentralization. It is not. Further, don't keep snipping our conversations. Otherwise, I might forget you earlier claims such as BTC has done rollbacks before. Also, your last two sentences seem to refer to forking. I hate overquoting. I think I stated clearly what centralization is - one entity holding 51% of the mining/forging power. This is not the case for NXT. Yes, my last sentences refer to forking. So what's your question? I fully agree with you here. People don't seem to understand what decentralisation means. |
|
|
|
Coordination of peers/forger into a voting block is not decentralized.
Not all Nxt holders will be involved in the decision-making process, and the smaller shareholders and retail partners will be alienated - even if such a measure reaches 51%.
In the case of retailers, they could potentially face loses for services rendered or products sold.
In view of that, what major investor or retailer would dare make any future commitments to Nxt if they know Nxt has a history of doing rollbacks?
Would a major retailer be willing to offer a Nxt payment option to their customers knowing a rollback is a possibility?
In crypto currencies the majority of miners/forgers decide everthing. It's 51% or so in PoW and in NXT at this time. When TF is implemented in NXT, then it will take 90% power to overcome the chain, which will make it more secure than PoW. Bitcoin did rollbacks in its history too, so nothing dramatic here. Yes, but that doesn't mean it is decentralized. In fact, centralization of mining power is one of the biggest concerns for BTC now. Further, I don't think BTC protocol allows rollbacks. Bitcoin itself has been rolled back... |
|
|
|
So, here is what's going to happen. In NXT, forgers decide what chain to forge on. NXT is all for decentralization. CfB is against a rollback, he said, but he sees not giving a choice to the community as a centralized decision on his part.That's why he's going to put a modified release for download, which rolls back the chain. If enough forgers download that release and forge with it and their chain is longer, then that chain wins and the hack is rolled back. If enough forgers stay on the old chain and keep it the longest, then the hack is not rolled back. That's how decentralization works in the PoS world. The equivalent in PoW would be 51% of the miners mining on the longest chain, it's same in PoS. Let's see how this drama unfolds  Interesting. A practical problem may be that most forgers automate, checking in maybe once or twice a month. Forgers should be actively notified of the position so that they download the release and forge the uncorrupted fork. I think this is right but by all means disagree with me if it is not. There is no such thing as corrupted or uncorrupted chain. Personally, I am going to forge on the old chain, because I believe in that people need to be their own bank and not keep funds at exchanges. You should advise your fellow NXTians that everyone should stop talking about not rolling back. Even if people are going to forge on the old chain the more they say "no rollback" the less chance the hacker will actually complete the deal with Lin. He has no incentive to send the money back and save everyone's money if all of the NXT community is shouting "NO ROLLBACK!" at the top of their lungs. At least bluff a little that it's going to be rolled back. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
